Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of one year and four months.

Criminal facts

On October 16, 2009, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of 2 months for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act at the Daejeon District Court on the condition that he/she was sentenced to a suspended sentence of 3 months for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act. On June 11, 2015, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of 10 months for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act. On April 7, 2016, the same court was sentenced to a suspended sentence of 10 months for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act and the said judgment became final and conclusive on July 18, 2016, and the suspended sentence became void on September 20, 2017.

On November 10, 2020, the Defendant driven D c or car under the influence of alcohol level of about 0.041% during blood alcohol level from around 00:15 to around 700 meters from the front parking lot of Daejeon Middle-gu Daejeon apartment to the front road of Daejeon Jung-gu.

Accordingly, the Defendant violated the prohibition of drinking alcohol driving regulations not less than twice.

Summary of Evidence

1. A written statement made by the accused accused concerning the State driver's license;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Application of a reply to inquiry, such as criminal history, (A);

1. Article 148-2(1) and Article 44-2(1) of the former Road Traffic Act (amended by Act No. 17371 of Jun. 9, 2020), Articles 148-2(1) and 44(1) of the same Act, the selection of punishment for a crime

1. The driving of drinking for the reason of sentencing under Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act is a serious crime that causes serious harm to the life, body, property, etc. of a person with no intention to commit the crime, and thus, the defendant who committed the crime should be held legally liable corresponding to the act. Despite the past record of the judgment, the defendant had been already nine times or more of punishment due to drinking, driving without a license, driving without alcohol, refusing to measure drinking, etc., the defendant's speech that the mistake is contrary to the criminal records of the crime in this case is no longer believed, and the defendant's speech that the mistake is contrary to the above criminal records, etc. rather, the defendant's intention to comply with law and eradicate drinking is very weak and the risk of recidivism is significantly high.

shall be deemed to be.